1) What is ETHICS?
2) What is JEWISH ETHICS?
1) According to this text, what is the source of morality?
2) How is this formulation of morality limited? What other behaviors could we learn from the cat, for example? How would we know which behaviors are "moral?"
3) What distinguishes human morality from an animal's sense of morality?
As you read the text, look up each verse for context.
1) According to this passage, what does it mean to "walk after God?"
2) Does bringing God into the equation change the worth of the practices discussed? Why or why not?
3) Might there be actions of God that we should not emulate?
4) Imitatio Dei: ethical behavior for human beings as an imitation of divine behavior. God is presented as a paragon of compassion, exercising care for human beings in their moments of vulnerability. We are supposed to imitate God in this respect but not, it seems, in other types of behaviors, like revenge. This text and understanding suggests that God serves as a necessary moral exemplar such that our conduct will not be only good, but holy.
The Gemara relates: Rav Yehuda was moving along behind Mar Shmuel in the market where pounded grain was sold. Rav Yehuda said to Shmuel: If one found a purse [arnakei] here, what is the halakha? Shmuel said to him that the halakha is as the mishna states: These belong to him. Rav Yehuda asked him: If a Jew came and provided a distinguishing mark to describe it, what is the halakha? Shmuel said to him: The finder is obligated to return it. Rav Yehuda asked: These are two contradictory rulings. Shmuel said to him: By law, it belongs to him. When I said the finder is obligated to return it if he learns the identity of the owner, that was beyond the letter of the law. This is like that incident where Shmuel’s father found these donkeys in the desert and returned them to their owner after the passage of twelve months of the year, as he acted lifnim mishurat hadin "beyond the letter of the law."
1) How is returning the purse different from other righteous behavior?
What kind of duty is acting lifnim mi-shurat ha-din, "inside the boundary of the law"* here? Moral? Legal? How do we know?
* Ethics goes beyond law by serving as an extension of Halakha. This is formulated as lifnim mi-shurat ha-din, "inside the boundary of the law," often paraphrased as going above and beyond the legal obligation. It refers to instances in which a person waives a legal right for another's benefit. In that sense, one is actually doing more than the law requires by not asserting one's full legal rights.
...והענין כי התורה הזהירה בעריות ובמאכלים האסורים והתירה הביאה איש באשתו ואכילת הבשר והיין א"כ ימצא בעל התאוה מקום להיות שטוף בזמת אשתו או נשיו הרבות ולהיות בסובאי יין בזוללי בשר למו וידבר כרצונו בכל הנבלות שלא הוזכר איסור זה בתורה והנה יהיה נבל ברשות התורה
...And the matter is [that] the Torah prohibited sexual transgressions and forbidden foods, and permitted sexual relations between husband and wife and the eating of meat and [the drinking of] wine. If so, a desirous person will find a place to be lecherous with his wife or his many wives, or to be among the guzzlers of wine and the gluttons of meat. He will speak as he pleases about all the vulgarities, the prohibition of which is not mentioned in the Torah. And behold, he would be a naval bir'shut ha-Torah, a "scoundrel with the permission of the Torah."
Naval BIr'shut Ha-Torah: Nahmanidies notes here, even if the Torah technically permits a particular activity, it might still be considered unethical.
It was taught in the baraita: “That they must perform”; that is referring to acting beyond the letter of the law, as Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Jerusalem was destroyed only for the fact that they adjudicated cases on the basis of Torah law in the city. The Gemara asks: Rather, what else should they have done? Should they rather have adjudicated cases on the basis of arbitrary decisions [demagizeta]? Rather, say: That they established their rulings on the basis of Torah law and did not act lifnim mishurat hadin "go beyond the letter of the law."
(כב) בֶּן בַּג בַּג אוֹמֵר, הֲפֹךְ בָּהּ וַהֲפֹךְ בָּהּ, דְּכֹלָּא בָהּ. וּבָהּ תֶּחֱזֵי, וְסִיב וּבְלֵה בָהּ, וּמִנַּהּ לֹא תָזוּעַ, שֶׁאֵין לְךָ מִדָּה טוֹבָה הֵימֶנָּה:
(22) Ben Bag Bag says: Search in it and search in it, since everything is in it. And in it should you look, and grow old and be worn in it; and from it do not move, since there is no characteristic greater than it.